"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
So, basically what you're saying is that after you review all the findings
from those in a better position than you to know the facts, you base your
decision upon their conclusions. Like you said, you go with the consensus.

Thanks for clarifying.


Facts are not conclusions.

How can there be a consensus (and what is it?) when there are conflicting
conclusions?

My decisions do consider others conclusions. It's still my decision based
upon facts and reason, not majority.

Show me the consensus.

The consensus is obvious. You don't have to have 100 percent agreement to
have consensus. I suggest you look up the definition.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Gilligan" wrote in message
...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
So, basically what you're saying is that after you review all the
findings from those in a better position than you to know the facts, you
base your decision upon their conclusions. Like you said, you go with the
consensus.

Thanks for clarifying.


Facts are not conclusions.

How can there be a consensus (and what is it?) when there are conflicting
conclusions?

My decisions do consider others conclusions. It's still my decision based
upon facts and reason, not majority.

Show me the consensus.